Todd Akin wishes you were more ladylike. September 28, 2012 Jill I’m writing in the Guardian about Akin and Republican lady problems.
Todd Akin’s comments on rape were deplorable, but they were not wholly representative of the Republican party. There will always be fringe candidates, and both parties have a history of committing to questionable policies. Democrats have in the past (disgustingly) accused President Bush of war crimes and as of recently, delegates overwhelmingly voted ‘no’ (even if the party leadership claim otherwise) to include Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and God in the Democratic platform.
President Bush (and his administration) are guilty of war crimes, I don’t understand what role the Democratic Party membership would play in determining the capital of a sovereign state and I hope they did keep “God” out of their political platform, since the US has a constitutional separation of church and state. So. You know.
Yeah, I just don’t get the hand wringing over not mentioning “God” in the party platform. What does God have to do with politics or the running of this country? What this country needs is more secularism, not political pandering to religious special interest groups.
I know, right? I mean, India’s 90something percent religious or non-practicing religious and there still isn’t such a ragefroth over “God” not being all over our laws. (This might have somethign to do with our lack of consensus on religion, but…the US doesn’t have an overwhelming consensus either. It’s baffling.)
But we’re a Christian Nation, Mac! LOL. I kid, because that overheated, chest-thumping God and Country brand of patriotism is just so silly and cartoonish as far as I’m concerned. One must not be festooned with crosses and wrapped up in a flag to want what is best for her neighbors and fellow citizens. All joking aside, I find it deeply disturbing how the religious right has seemingly hijacked the definition of patriotism and what it means to be an American over the last 20 years or so. And I don’t see how it can end well if we don’t as a country put a stop to it.
Right. I’m Catholic and I still found it incredibly distasteful and offensive to include God in the party platform, especially WITH the objections of at least half of the members in attendance.
Democrats have in the past (disgustingly) accused President Bush of war crimes and as of recently, delegates overwhelmingly voted ‘no’ (even if the party leadership claim otherwise) to include Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and God in the Democratic platform.
Tell ya what, Omar (and I say this as no friend to the Democratic party), come on back over and tell us about the virtues of the Republican Party when they don’t install a stain like Paul Ryan to their VP position, aren’t threatening reproductive rights, and have cast the Christianists out of their tent. Until then, the Republicans will have to deal with people like Akin being seen as their face because…you know…he kinda is. Also, torture is a war crime. That you find such an obvious connection to be “disgusting” does not speak well of either your intellectual honesty or your basic humanity.
Even before the torture, Bush ordered the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation. He knew (as did his administration) that the “evidence” they presented was false. He knew that Osama bin Laden and Iraq played no role in the September 11 attacks on the US and posed no threat to the US or its allies. He invaded anyway. I mean, I hate to Godwin myself, but Germans really felt that “lebensraum” was a valid argument for invading Czechoslovakia and Poland too.
Yeah, I did. Duh. That’ll teach me to post under the influence of Robaxicet. Thanks for the correction.
Todd Akin and 149 Republican delegates tried to change language to include his forcible rape dogma. I’d say he speaks their truth, they just wish he wouldn’t tell us what it is.
@Omar Unfortunately for the future of the GOP, Jill Filipovic’s insight is spot-on. GOP elites rethought their rejection of Akin as soon as they recalled that his misogyny reflects the attitudes of the Missouri GOP ‘base.’ There is a method in the GOP’s madness. Akin’s views do not necessarily offend older, higher-income, white women in Missouri and elsewhere who don’t necessarily empathize with younger women’s struggle for abortion rights and other issues. These older white women also are more frequently energized to vote, so playing to their prejudice against younger women will energize the ‘base’ and not necessarily lose an active segment of women voters. That’s deplorable, but the GOP relies on this strategy to win close elections.
Don’t forget that the GOP can count on a certain percentage of the upper and middle class electorate to vote not based on conscience but on self-interest. If you’re making $120k a year and live in Missouri you can deprioritize abortion access and reproductive rights because Illinois’ relatively permissive laws are less than a weekend trip away. You can also rationalize limiting the rights of other women because, really, how much can a Greyhound or Megabus cost? If you (believe you) have the resources to work around the GOP’s misogyny then you might hold your nose and vote in favor of lower taxes.
James, Would it be fair for me to take the comments here (false claims that the former President of the United States was somehow aware Iraq was not connected to 9/11, or he is somehow at the level of Pol Pot and Ghaddafi) and conflate them with the entire Democratic party? No, so don’t do it for the Republicans either. There are bound to be crazy people that will be attracted to both political parties, as there are only two parties. Far left politicians such as Mike Gravel, Dennis Kuinich or Alan Grayson are no more representative of the vast majority of Democrats as Todd Aikin and Ron Paul are of the Republicans. Reasonable people can disagree about abortion, contraceptives covered by insurance, etc. but there is no ‘concerted’ effort to wage war on women just as there is no secret plan from President Obama to replace capitalism with socialism.
President Bush had access to intelligence proving that Iraq had no role in the September 11 attacks. Reports indicating that Iraq was involved were falsified by his administration. Perhaps they did it without his knowledge and he was duped. Maybe he’s that stupid. Take your pick – stupidity or duplicity. If you think Dennis Kucinich is ‘far left’ then you don’t have a clue what the left looks like. There is no secret war on women, I agree. The war on women is no secret. We can disagree on abortion and birth control but you don’t have the right to tell me what to do with my body. By the way, I’d love to hear your “reasonable” argument why a person can’t purchase medical insurance that covers preventative birth control or demand it as part of their employment compensation package.
By the way, I’d love to hear your “reasonable” argument why a person can’t purchase medical insurance that covers preventative birth control or demand it as part of their employment compensation package. Freedom of religion! Note that Luke wrote in his gospel, “And yea, may you withhold hormonal contraceptives, whether you be a pharmacist or one of millions paying into a common pool for health services, lest you discourage heathen women from populating the world in His name. Yea.” Don’t you believe in the first amendment??
If you think Dennis Kucinich is ‘far left’ then you don’t have a clue what the left looks like. Seriously. Kucinich is just a classic liberal, and my memory is that he cannot be relied upon when it comes to abortion rights.
Sorry, had to reply to this. As a KC doctor, I am appalled that you think anyone will abandon their principals, based on tax rates. Most of my colleagues find Akin an embarrassment or a joke and wouldn’t vote for him under any circumstances. They have enough integrity that they would never vote for someone that stupid, either, regardless of the tax rates. How can the science-based community vote for someone who is ignorant of junior high biology, regardless of income? Do you remember that it was the local KC Operation Rescue who killed Dr. Tiller? We remember. For the poor in western Missouri and especially Southwest Missouri, Illinois is not an easy, inexpensive jaunt (and do medical procedures usually happen on the weekends)? Don’t write off everyone here based on your stereotypes.
I’m not saying that anyone will abandon their principles because of tax rates, I’m saying that when you have someone who is thinking about ten different issues when they’re deciding who to vote for might de-prioritize reproductive rights in favor of other kinds of self-interest or other issues they see as important especially if they have the resources to get around potential restrictions. People do this all the time, its required to cast a ballot because you’re never going to be able to find a candidate who agrees with you on everything. I’m passionate about gun rights, for instance, but I often find myself voting for anti-gun candidates because the other issues on the table (like reproductive rights and a desire to keep disgusting Christianists out of office) override even my deeply held personal beliefs. I’m not writing off the entire state of Missouri. But, lets be honest, in the US politics (on the occasions when its actually competitive) generally comes down to two relatively rigid and predictable bases doing what they did in the last ten elections while a group of largely ignorant or poorly-informed “independents” cast the deciding votes based on gut reactions and name recognition. Someone who would themselves have an abortion but has voted Republican for the last ten years, thinks Mexicans are taking their jobs, and has the resources to cross over into Illinois if they need abortion access probably won’t vote Democrat, even against someone like Akin, if they agree with him on other issues. The GOP knows this and plans it’s strategy accordingly. Its not just Missouri, Chicago gave Daley a quarter of a century on the power of racism and inertia.
Possibly unrelated, but I’ve started giving people who call Dubya “President Bush” the side-eye like whoa. Is it a normal thing to call a former president by the title? I don’t hear “President Reagan” or “President Lincoln” being used in the same way, they’re usualyl just last-named. This only happens to Shrubbity afaict, and it always seems like a sideswipe at Obama not being a “real” president. Because, uh, you know, for reasons that have nothing to do with his race! Of course. (Or I could be totally wrong. USians? What gives?)
Mac, there is certainly a racial component to the disdain shown to President Obama, particularly here in the South. I’m not sure that dropping “former” for Bush is that significant, although using “President” to designate Bush might be. People who serve as President are entitled to be called “President” after their term(s) end(s). Not that many former presidents are still active on the political scene, and most can be referred to using “President” or as “Carter” or “Bush 1” or “Bush 2” but the “Former Pres” label is used often with Bill Clinton, probably to distinguish him from Secretary of State Clinton given that both of them are still relevant on the US political scene, and given that Secy of State Clinton could still become president (unlikely though that is).
It’s not just Presidents, is it? It seems that once you get a title in the US, you always have it. Once an Ambassador, always an ambassador, etc.
It’s also horrifying (at least to me) that I’ve noticed whenever the President is brought up in a conversation by a Repug or is mentioned in a Repug political ad, he’s never called by his title, only by his last name. They call him “Obama”, not “President Obama”. It’s an intentional slight… and a racist dog whistle.
It is common practice to still use the honorific. Sometimes “former” is specified, but not always. I think it switches to just last name when they hair died.
It is interesting that in the comments under Jill Filipovic’s Guardian piece one can detect a section of the non-US readership that is turned off by what they perceive as an implausible interpretation of a party platform and its huge following within a large part of the US. I saw the same disbelief from the editorial staff of The New Yorker during W’s campaign for re-election. Surely people in the US don’t really think Fox is “Fair and Balanced”? Surely the GOP can’t expect the US people to fall for this stuff! Um. Yes. For those of us who live in the deep Red States, this is pretty mainstream political discourse. It’s not that politicians in Europe are higher-minded in their opposition to a Patriarchal oligarchy, but they do have to be more discreet because expressing those views might lose votes. Expressing them here actually gains votes unless they go too far, which I guess the Akin interpretation of female anti-conception protection mechanisms did. It is a relief to me that at least the wackaloonery is out in the open during this election cycle, and doesn’t come as too much of a shock to even the Bluest of political commentators.
It’s not that politicians in Europe are higher-minded in their opposition to a Patriarchal oligarchy, but they do have to be more discreet because expressing those views might lose votes. Ummm… speaking for the UK, the most secular country in Europe, I can say you are completely wrong. Even members of the Conservative Party (our right-wingers) and present government do not hold such “peculiar” views as your GOP. We have abortion pretty much on demand up to 24 weeks, no fire-bombing of clinics or shootings of doctors. We have free contraception, free morning-after pill, (and no, I haven’t read of a single pharmacist refusing to provide it on religious grounds) free health care at the point of delivery and the last nurse who claimed unfair dismissal for refusing to participate in abortions on religious grounds lost her case. I think on the whole we tend to be considerably more enlightened than some of you across the Pond on certain issues. Abortion and access to contraception just aren’t hot potatoes like they are in the US. Frankly it baffles me why they are in the US… (scratches head, bemusedly)… Can’t say we’re perfect of course…
I should also say we don’t do God in public here. Maybe that’s got a lot to do with it? If a politician starts talking about Jesus, it’s time to retire him. Tony Blair did it for a while, but frankly he’s viewed now as a disaster.
I lived in the UK through Thatcher and Major, and I don’t find the system any less Patriarchal than here. It is true that the emphasis on religion is indeed peculiar to the US (outside of openly theocratic nations), but if you view religion as a pretty powerful weapon to control women and their bodies it takes a different flavor. This wouldn’t work in the UK because people are not, on the whole, religious. The point I was trying to make is that the disbelief Jill faced in her editorial column from UK-based readers that a mainstream political party might be so sexist (using religion as a tool) was also present in the US until the most recent electoral cycle. Open misogyny in politics is rare in Europe, because it isn’t countenanced by the masses, but one has only to look at DSK and his history of women procured for him to enjoy in orgiastic settings by his cronies to see that it lurks not too far beneath the surface, and for every person who is appalled, there are probably more who think this is a woman’s place and a great man’s right.
This is a particularly British form of misogyny, one that would not be countenanced in the US: The effect is similar: speak and you will be silenced either by impugning your lack of ladylikeness or the undesirability of your breasts.
The link: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/caroline-criadoperez/page-3-ban-petition_b_1898111.html If that’s it, I’m not sure what you’re on about? US folk are pretty good at silencing women.
Yes XtinaS, US people are excellent at silencing women, which was the point of Jill’s OP. So are Europeans. They just use different weapons. My point is that Page 3 defenders would be as welcome here as politicians spouting religion in the UK. John seemed to be implying in his answer to my previous post that the UK was so enlightened in its attitudes to women’s rights compared to the US. I posted the Hattie of Camberwell article to show I’m not convinced.
I’m not quite sure why my last post didn’t make it through. Surely it’s not a problem for one single commentator to explain how Todd Aikin is not representative of the GOP, in the same way that far-left politicians such as Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich or Alan Grayson are representative of Democrats?
I’m not quite sure why my last post didn’t make it through. Surely it’s not a problem for one single commentator to explain how Todd Aikin is not representative of the GOP, in the same way that far-left politicians such as Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich or Alan Grayson are representative of Democrats? Are you really this obtuse? Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich and Alan Grayson ARE representative of Democrats! Todd Akin is representative of the Republican Party. It’s in the job description, in fact it’s in the job title for 3 out of the 4 (Gravel, I believe is a Senator, but the others are ‘Representatives’) If he went one step further and said, ‘I don’t think there’s anything wrong with rape’, would he be kicked out of the Republican party? Probably yes. If he said that he though President Bush was responsible for 9/11 would the Republican party drop him? Probably yes. Why? Because the Republican party thinks those things are outrageous, whereas many Republican pundits are still deluding themselves that Akin was guilty of nothing more than misspeaking.
I’m not quite sure why my last post didn’t make it through. Ask Todd Akin what the Lord would say about working on Sundays, and perhaps you allow Jill a day of rest.
For a guy not representative of the GOP he sure has some big names raising money for him. Via Politico: Tom Carpenter, Wexler & Walker Public Policy Associates Ryan Bradel, Esquire, Greenberg Traurig, LLP Honorary Hosts Senator Tom Coburn Senator Jim DeMint Senator James Inhofe Senator Lindsey Graham Invite you to join them at a Luncheon for U.S. Representative Todd Akin Republican Nominee for Missouri U.S. Senate Wednesday, October 3, 2012 Eastgate 710 East Capitol Street, NE, Washington, DC Suggested Donations: $2,500—Host $1,000 – PACs $500 – Individual $250 – Young Professionals Todd Akin for US Senate, PO Box 31222, St. Louis, MO 63131
I do happen to feel that somehow the media managed to distract liberals by focusing on the term ‘legitimate rape.’ 98% of the pieces I read focused on the term ‘legitimate rape’ but look at what Akin said: If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. Taking the word ‘legitimate’ out, you get” If it’s a rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. and the sentence is literally no less offensive.
p.s. How did I acquire this strange little avatar that seems to be linked to my posts, and what is it?